Regarding the operation of the breakers, I wonder if there is any "over-center" toggle type of snap action, where, when moved past some point in the rotation the tendency is for the motion to continue without additional force applied. Most of the lever actuated switches that I am familiar with operate this way,

Yes, that was covered back there somewhere when I brought it up. Also trips for a reason was brought up. Try a single reset was the advice but do not exceed one try.

As to the motor? As long as it meets the torque requirements and can meet the reset requirements.

Ron

 

I assume since this remote reset is desired, there is implied a long distance from the operator to the breaker. A scenario like on a ship or inside a large a plant, where the operator might be separated from the breaker (and from the controlled equipment) by tens of meters and many walls.


+1


Think about the sequence of human actions normally required to reset a breaker.

1. Investigate involved equipment, check for jams, etc.
2. Walk circuit back to MCC or control panel.
3. (For this kind of breaker) open control panel, locate breaker.
4. Is it actually tripped or has it been turned off? Is it tagged out? Why?
5. Reset/Turn breaker breaker on. Does it immediately trip?

Now consider whether the above sequence is required due to an unavailability of the technology needed to remotely reset a breaker, or whether it is deliberate.

Steps 1: this allows you to see the cause of the problem more often than not. Is there a smoking motor? What if there is a jam and the jam is a person?

Step 2: this allows you to see if there is a problem in the circuit that the breaker is meant to protect. Has a forklift crushed a conduit against a wall? Is there a hapless idiot with a non-insulated multi-tool holding a severed cable and trying to "splice" it?

Step 3: this allows you to see the other end of the system where the problem might be. Is there a smell of magic smoke inside the cabinet? Where is is it coming from?

Step 4: how do you lock out/tag out something like this? With a bit in the PLC? Sorry but I am not willing to work on something that can be flipped on at whim by the operator after shift change.

Step 5: when you turn the breaker on, any unsettling noises? Smells? Explosions? Screams of anguish?

All or most of these steps are assuredly going to be skipped altogether if there were a remote reset. The person blindly flipping the breaker from a touchscreen in cozy control room somewhere is going to have no idea of the consequence of their actions. They are potentially starting fires, destroying motors, killing people, etc. every time they press that button and they probably won't be sufficiently warned of the dangers.

The process of resetting a breaker is meant to demand a fairly intimate involvement from a human. Putting this kind of device on it is negating nearly its entire purpose.

Please stop trying to justify Me... You know just one piece of story not full story... of course my client is datacenter company and that's very high automation... every level of downstream circuit breaker is have recloser... and every branch circuit is monitored continuously (current, frequency, power factor, voltage)... every incoming sources waveform is monitored continuously (if there is waveform distortion, etc we can know early)... we have surveillance camera to detect fire, etc... even the facility have level 7 cleanroom for R&D (actually it's between level 6 and 7, but certified for level 7 only)... that's very long story to tell all about datacenter facility... I just don't need to tell all about the facility just for MCCB case...

 

I assume since this remote reset is desired, there is implied a long distance from the operator to the breaker. A scenario like on a ship or inside a large a plant, where the operator might be separated from the breaker (and from the controlled equipment) by tens of meters and many walls.


+1


Think about the sequence of human actions normally required to reset a breaker.

1. Investigate involved equipment, check for jams, etc.
2. Walk circuit back to MCC or control panel.
3. (For this kind of breaker) open control panel, locate breaker.
4. Is it actually tripped or has it been turned off? Is it tagged out? Why?
5. Reset/Turn breaker breaker on. Does it immediately trip?

Now consider whether the above sequence is required due to an unavailability of the technology needed to remotely reset a breaker, or whether it is deliberate.

Steps 1: this allows you to see the cause of the problem more often than not. Is there a smoking motor? What if there is a jam and the jam is a person?

Step 2: this allows you to see if there is a problem in the circuit that the breaker is meant to protect. Has a forklift crushed a conduit against a wall? Is there a hapless idiot with a non-insulated multi-tool holding a severed cable and trying to "splice" it?

Step 3: this allows you to see the other end of the system where the problem might be. Is there a smell of magic smoke inside the cabinet? Where is is it coming from?

Step 4: how do you lock out/tag out something like this? With a bit in the PLC? Sorry but I am not willing to work on something that can be flipped on at whim by the operator after shift change.

Step 5: when you turn the breaker on, any unsettling noises? Smells? Explosions? Screams of anguish?

All or most of these steps are assuredly going to be skipped altogether if there were a remote reset. The person blindly flipping the breaker from a touchscreen in cozy control room somewhere is going to have no idea of the consequence of their actions. They are potentially starting fires, destroying motors, killing people, etc. every time they press that button and they probably won't be sufficiently warned of the dangers.

The process of resetting a breaker is meant to demand a fairly intimate involvement from a human. Putting this kind of device on it is negating nearly its entire purpose.

Even if can opened suspected downstream breaker then reclose upstream MCCB automatically for uptime requirements... we can monitor downstream breaker from current, voltage,...

 

I assume since this remote reset is desired, there is implied a long distance from the operator to the breaker. A scenario like on a ship or inside a large a plant, where the operator might be separated from the breaker (and from the controlled equipment) by tens of meters and many walls.


+1


Think about the sequence of human actions normally required to reset a breaker.

1. Investigate involved equipment, check for jams, etc.
2. Walk circuit back to MCC or control panel.
3. (For this kind of breaker) open control panel, locate breaker.
4. Is it actually tripped or has it been turned off? Is it tagged out? Why?
5. Reset/Turn breaker breaker on. Does it immediately trip?

Now consider whether the above sequence is required due to an unavailability of the technology needed to remotely reset a breaker, or whether it is deliberate.

Steps 1: this allows you to see the cause of the problem more often than not. Is there a smoking motor? What if there is a jam and the jam is a person?

Step 2: this allows you to see if there is a problem in the circuit that the breaker is meant to protect. Has a forklift crushed a conduit against a wall? Is there a hapless idiot with a non-insulated multi-tool holding a severed cable and trying to "splice" it?

Step 3: this allows you to see the other end of the system where the problem might be. Is there a smell of magic smoke inside the cabinet? Where is is it coming from?

Step 4: how do you lock out/tag out something like this? With a bit in the PLC? Sorry but I am not willing to work on something that can be flipped on at whim by the operator after shift change.

Step 5: when you turn the breaker on, any unsettling noises? Smells? Explosions? Screams of anguish?

All or most of these steps are assuredly going to be skipped altogether if there were a remote reset. The person blindly flipping the breaker from a touchscreen in cozy control room somewhere is going to have no idea of the consequence of their actions. They are potentially starting fires, destroying motors, killing people, etc. every time they press that button and they probably won't be sufficiently warned of the dangers.

The process of resetting a breaker is meant to demand a fairly intimate involvement from a human. Putting this kind of device on it is negating nearly its entire purpose.

I am very appreciated your time for answer... but it's not really a problem here...

 

Its 80:1 gearbox ratio, available in 3nm and 4nm

If that is GB output, it should be ample.

 

Yes, that was covered back there somewhere when I brought it up. Also trips for a reason was brought up. Try a single reset was the advice but do not exceed one try.

As to the motor? As long as it meets the torque requirements and can meet the reset requirements.

Ron

Yes, that was covered back there somewhere when I brought it up. Also trips for a reason was brought up. Try a single reset was the advice but do not exceed one try.

As to the motor? As long as it meets the torque requirements and can meet the reset requirements.

Ron

This response tells me that what I am suggesting is neither understood nor even considered. Solid direct drive is not suitable and will not function correctly no matter how precise it can be made.
NONE of the proposed considerations have made any comment about allowing the snap action motions to happen as intended.
But now it is mentioned, in post #42, that the intended application is for a very large automated data center, we can now understand that most of the suggestions are far off target, in fact, many miles off target.
In an automated system such as a data center, there are two classes of failures, the first class being those problems that the automation can handle by itself, without human assistance, and the second class of failures being hardware failures where the automation can not effect a repair by itself, and humans must physically replace modules or segments.

 

Well then I apparently misunderstood your suggestion. Sorry. Personally I don't see any of this as a good idea but...? When a manual breaker trips we can figure it was not designed for a motor to reset it. That pretty much being the start and stop of it. However, if the thread starter wants to motorize a reset it's on them.

Ron

 

Well then I apparently misunderstood your suggestion. Sorry. Personally I don't see any of this as a good idea but...? When a manual breaker trips we can figure it was not designed for a motor to reset it. That pretty much being the start and stop of it. However, if the thread starter wants to motorize a reset it's on them.

Ron

I don't think of it as a good idea either. But a mechanical drive scheme must be able to emulate doing the reset by hand, and that means allowing the snap action that most switching devices exhibit during the portion of the knob or lever motion has resulted in enough stored spring energy to make the action move at the design speed. That part is important, usually involving some lost motion (free-play), which is the opposite of what most servo system designers strive for.

Really, though, if the system already is monitored as close as described by MS in post #42, then that same monitor system should be able, with just a bit of increased control, perform all of the duties of an "MCB" or even the larger MCCB" breakers, and be able to reset itself as required. That will leave the manually-reset devices to provide the protection against the hardware failure destruction they are intended to protect against.
So there is that concern about nuisance tripping of breakers, which should not ever happen in a correctly designed system where transient currents are all accounted for and adequately accommodated. At least that has been my experience during a long career.

 

Well then I apparently misunderstood your suggestion. Sorry. Personally I don't see any of this as a good idea but...? When a manual breaker trips we can figure it was not designed for a motor to reset it. That pretty much being the start and stop of it. However, if the thread starter wants to motorize a reset it's on them.

Ron

You're right... I think this is good idea too...
This not only for resetting tripped breaker for scheduled maintenance, etc...
Breaker location from one area to another is about one hundred meter, they will bad idea for operator to running if there is any failures for just resetting or to scheduled maintenance...
Problem is government required peoples with fresh graduate (no experience at all) to work in this area... (I needs another preventive methods for stupid operator..)

 

If the circuit protection is 100M distant from the loads in a data center then there would be far more connection wire used that is efficient. Local distribution panels with the branch circuits being much shorter wire runs will be a more cost effective use of resources .
I am assuming that this would be a larger data center with perhaps 50 or 100 of the smaller circuit breakers feeding branches for the many equipment groups. The large number of individual branches running at least 100m will be quite a lot of wire volume.
Local distribution panels and much shorter branch circuits should be considered.
I realize that the TS is only selling hardware, but possibly a suggestion to the ultimate designer is in order?

 

If the circuit protection is 100M distant from the loads in a data center then there would be far more connection wire used that is efficient. Local distribution panels with the branch circuits being much shorter wire runs will be a more cost effective use of resources .
I am assuming that this would be a larger data center with perhaps 50 or 100 of the smaller circuit breakers feeding branches for the many equipment groups. The large number of individual branches running at least 100m will be quite a lot of wire volume.
Local distribution panels and much shorter branch circuits should be considered.
I realize that the TS is only selling hardware, but possibly a suggestion to the ultimate designer is in order?

No, I am not selling hardware, I am designer and implementor to..., after finish my job needs to be certified through government inspections, after success my job is done...

 

Well then I apparently misunderstood your suggestion. Sorry. Personally I don't see any of this as a good idea but...? When a manual breaker trips we can figure it was not designed for a motor to reset it. That pretty much being the start and stop of it. However, if the thread starter wants to motorize a reset it's on them.

Ron

You not needs to say sorry... I am very appreciated your answer

 

No, I am not selling hardware, I am designer and implementor to..., after finish my job needs to be certified through government inspections, after success my job is done...

Ok, then as the designer and builder organization I suggest considering the relative expense of having the many individual wiring runs from the distant circuit breaker panel location instead of locating that panel with all of the MCB devices much closer to the loads, and just using the larger circuit breakers at the power entrance location as they would be with the current plan. All of those many 100m individual circuits will be a lot of labor and wire cost to provide.
My normal consulting fee for advice such as this is quite expensive.